Inside the Lines

Not very good direction or script here but Betty Compson is quite good as the German spy during WW I who finds herself in Gibraltar posing as a long-lost friend of the hostess. Of course she also has access to military secrets concerning the British fleet there. Also there is her old boy friend (Ralph Forbes) who is in the military. He plays along with Compson's disguise, trying to figure out what she's up to. Which one is the real spy?

Montagu Love, Mischa Auer, Betty Carter, Ivan Simpson, Reginald Sharland co-star.

And yes that's really Compson playing the violin.

Another unfortunately static talky from 1930, concerning Betty Compson playing a German spy during the First World War in Gibraltar. Compson occasionally manages a decently spoken line, but everyone else overacts, except for von Brincker as the German spymaster, who seems to be reading his lines phonetically off cue cards. The one slow traveling shot two-thirds of the way through the movie doesn't help as everyone speaks very clearly, very loudly and with great emPHASis.

Rarely have I seen a film that I really enjoyed--only to be completely annoyed by an ending that was just dreadful. In other words, all the time I spent on the rest of the film was wasted! Betty Compson stars in this early talkie from RKO films. It begins just before WWI and she is in love with a German guy. But, their love is interrupted by the outbreak of the war and, without explanation, she leaves him. Suddenly, she is meeting with folks in German intelligence--it turns out she's a spy! Now why she broke up with this German I couldn't understand...but oh well.

Her mission is to go to Gibralter to infiltrate the home of the fortress' commander in order to steal some secrets. She impersonates a lady who you assume the Germans have killed. Soon after arriving, however, her old German boyfriend turns up--and he's wearing a British uniform!! Huh?! Talk about a crazy coincidence. And you are now wondering WHO is won WHAT side. This wasn't bad...but baffling.

Unfortunately, how all this worked out in the end was COMPLETELY baffling. Suddenly the writers were faced with the problem of trying to get Betty and her old boyfriend back together. And, they couldn't let them do anything to kill thousands of British sailors (after all, this ISN'T very romantic). So, it results in the most contrived and ridiculous ending I've ever seen. Characters literally do 180 degree turns and behave in ways that just seemed to come out of left field--and you have no idea what's happening. It seriously looked like the ending was just improvised at the last minute and so much of it violated what you'd already seen in the first 80% of the film!! How infuriating! In addition to the frustrating of seeing the convoluted plot, the film also had exceptionally poor sound--which seemed to come and go. It's all pretty sad, as the film WAS pretty good up until the end and up until the sound started disappearing! Not worth your time.

A common fault made by contemporary critics of the early talkies is to contrast them with techniques that we have since become accustomed to. Audiences as well as actors once knew only stage productions. When films began to be shown in the same halls in which plays were performed, they conformed to the play format. The "drawing room" dramas were little else but filmed plays. Moreover, movable cameras did not always exist. Stage acting was highly stylized and preferred by audiences. For one, voices had to carry—and without the aid of microphones. Thus, diction had to be clipped and enunciation precise so that dialogue would not be muddled by the time it reached the ears of those in the back rows. This compensation remained a necessity in the early days of sound film as audio equipment had yet to be more developed. A later desire for "natural" acting was accommodated by more advanced sound techniques in movie making. Again, it was expected that actors "acted." Thespians were to be more emotive than ordinary people in ordinary conversation. Movie-goers did not pay to see—and later hear—people that they could see for nothing on any street corner. As to the plot of this drama, it had the elements wished for by the paying crowds. Movies then, like movies today, were and are a commodity. They either speak to their time or they go bust. Again to the plot: we have had exposure to nearly ninety years of filmmaking since "Inside the Lines" was released. Much that rings familiar now was new at that time. Plot devices we see coming were at this time novel. In defense of this production, it was well written, directed, and performed, according to one man's opinion.